Literature DB >> 15241576

Bouncing or streaming? Exploring the influence of auditory cues on the interpretation of ambiguous visual motion.

Daniel Sanabria1, Angel Correa, Juan Lupiáñez, Charles Spence.   

Abstract

When looking at two identical objects moving toward each other on a two-dimensional visual display, two different events can be perceived: the objects can either be seen to bounce off each other, or else to stream through one another. Previous research has shown that the large bias normally seen toward the streaming percept can be modulated by the presentation of an auditory event at the moment of coincidence. However, previous behavioral research on this crossmodal effect has always relied on subjective report. In the present experiment, we used a novel experimental design to provide a more objective/implicit measure of the effect of an auditory cue on visual motion perception. In our study, two disks moved toward each other, with the point of coincidence hidden behind an occluder. When emerging from behind the occluder, the disks (one red, the other blue) could either follow the same trajectory (streaming) or else move in the opposite direction (bouncing). Participants made speeded discrimination responses regarding the side from which one of the disks emerged from behind the occluder. Participants responded more rapidly on streaming trials when no sound was presented and on bouncing trials when the sound was presented at the moment of coincidence. These results provide the first empirical demonstration of the auditory modulation of an ambiguous visual motion display using an implicit/objective behavioral measure of perception.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15241576     DOI: 10.1007/s00221-004-1993-z

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Exp Brain Res        ISSN: 0014-4819            Impact factor:   1.972


  13 in total

1.  Postcoincidence trajectory duration affects motion event perception.

Authors:  K Watanabe; S Shimojo
Journal:  Percept Psychophys       Date:  2001-01

2.  Visual motion priming by invisible actions.

Authors:  A Wohlschläger
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  2000       Impact factor: 1.886

3.  Collisions between moving visual targets: what controls alternative ways of seeing an ambiguous display?

Authors:  A B Sekuler; R Sekuler
Journal:  Perception       Date:  1999       Impact factor: 1.490

4.  Sound enhances visual perception: cross-modal effects of auditory organization on vision.

Authors:  J Vroomen; B de Gelder
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  2000-10       Impact factor: 3.332

5.  Form and motion coherence activate independent, but not dorsal/ventral segregated, networks in the human brain.

Authors:  O J Braddick; J M O'Brien; J Wattam-Bell; J Atkinson; R Turner
Journal:  Curr Biol       Date:  2000-06-15       Impact factor: 10.834

6.  Attentional modulation in perception of visual motion events.

Authors:  K Watanabe; S Shimojo
Journal:  Perception       Date:  1998       Impact factor: 1.490

7.  Causal capture: contextual effects on the perception of collision events.

Authors:  Brian J Scholl; Ken Nakayama
Journal:  Psychol Sci       Date:  2002-11

8.  Neural correlates of cross-modal binding.

Authors:  Khalafalla O Bushara; Takashi Hanakawa; Ilka Immisch; Keiichiro Toma; Kenji Kansaku; Mark Hallett
Journal:  Nat Neurosci       Date:  2003-02       Impact factor: 24.884

9.  Covert communication in the psychological experiment.

Authors:  R Rosenthal
Journal:  Psychol Bull       Date:  1967-05       Impact factor: 17.737

10.  Directional bias in the perception of translating patterns.

Authors:  B I Bertenthal; T Banton; A Bradbury
Journal:  Perception       Date:  1993       Impact factor: 1.490

View more
  8 in total

1.  Multi-sensory integration of spatio-temporal segmentation cues: one plus one does not always equal two.

Authors:  Feng Zhou; Victoria Wong; Robert Sekuler
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2007-02-27       Impact factor: 1.972

2.  Auditory motion affects visual motion perception in a speeded discrimination task.

Authors:  Daniel Sanabria; Juan Lupiáñez; Charles Spence
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2007-03-13       Impact factor: 1.972

3.  Auditory grouping occurs prior to intersensory pairing: evidence from temporal ventriloquism.

Authors:  Mirjam Keetels; Jeroen Stekelenburg; Jean Vroomen
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2007-02-06       Impact factor: 1.972

4.  Pre-coincidence brain activity predicts the perceptual outcome of streaming/bouncing motion display.

Authors:  Song Zhao; Yajie Wang; Lina Jia; Chengzhi Feng; Yu Liao; Wenfeng Feng
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2017-08-18       Impact factor: 4.379

5.  Visual detection of time-varying signals: Opposing biases and their timescales.

Authors:  Urit Gordon; Shimon Marom; Naama Brenner
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2019-11-14       Impact factor: 3.240

6.  Aging and audio-visual and multi-cue integration in motion.

Authors:  Eugenie Roudaia; Allison B Sekuler; Patrick J Bennett; Robert Sekuler
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2013-05-23

7.  Generic HRTFs May be Good Enough in Virtual Reality. Improving Source Localization through Cross-Modal Plasticity.

Authors:  Christopher C Berger; Mar Gonzalez-Franco; Ana Tajadura-Jiménez; Dinei Florencio; Zhengyou Zhang
Journal:  Front Neurosci       Date:  2018-02-02       Impact factor: 4.677

Review 8.  Audiovisual Temporal Perception in Aging: The Role of Multisensory Integration and Age-Related Sensory Loss.

Authors:  Cassandra J Brooks; Yu Man Chan; Andrew J Anderson; Allison M McKendrick
Journal:  Front Hum Neurosci       Date:  2018-05-09       Impact factor: 3.169

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.